Distinguishing protest responses in contingent valuation: A conceptualization of motivations and attitudes behind them

The percentage of protesters in contingent valuation surveys is substantial-about 20% across many studies. This paper seeks to clarify the motivations behind protest responses. In addition, the question whether the estimation of willingness to pay (WTP) is more biased by the exclusion or inclusion o...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:PloS one Ročník 14; číslo 1; s. e0209872
Hlavní autoři: Frey, Ulrich J., Pirscher, Frauke
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: United States Public Library of Science 08.01.2019
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Témata:
Activists
Adult
Analysis
Animal husbandry
Animal welfare
Animal Welfare - economics
Animal Welfare - ethics
Animals
Animals, Domestic
Attitude
Bias
Biology and Life Sciences
Contingent valuation
Economic models
Female
Financing, Personal
Germany
Humans
Male
Managerial economics
Medicine and Health Sciences
Middle Aged
Morals
Motivation (Psychology)
Motivation - ethics
Polls & surveys
Research and Analysis Methods
Social Sciences
Surveys
Surveys and Questionnaires
Willingness to pay
Germany
ISSN:1932-6203, 1932-6203
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:The percentage of protesters in contingent valuation surveys is substantial-about 20% across many studies. This paper seeks to clarify the motivations behind protest responses. In addition, the question whether the estimation of willingness to pay (WTP) is more biased by the exclusion or inclusion of protest bids is yet undecided. Methodological improvements are difficult for three reasons: motivations behind protest responses are largely unclear, definitions of protest differ between studies and often only participants who state a zero WTP are asked for their reasons. Our survey on farm animal welfare (n = 1335) provides detailed motivations, two definitions and includes debriefing of all participants for their WTP. We find that protest bids are not a refusal to answer, they are neither irrational nor driven by lack of understanding. Quite the contrary, a large part of participants is directly motivated by moral reasons. Furthermore, protest responses are not coupled to a zero WTP. In our sample, only 8% out of 32% protesting participants had a zero WTP. Only a small fraction of zero bids (0.4%) are true WTP-statements, i.e. respondents were satisfied with the status quo. This finding has important implications for existing WTP-estimates which might be biased. Finally, we provide detailed estimates of the WTP for animal welfare issues by including and excluding different types of protesters and outliers.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0209872